Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/266/2012

Nagulakonda Ranganayakamma - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Kiran Krishna Real Estate and Construction Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

S. Sridhar

11 Nov 2014

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:24-08-2012   

                                                                                                Date of Order:11-11-2014

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao,  M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                          Tuesday, the11^th day of November, 2014.

                              CONSUMER CASE No.266/2012

Between:-

Nagulakonda Ranganayakamma, W/o Sreeramulu,

Hindu, aged about 65 years, represented by

 G.P.A. Holder Syed Mujeeb, S/o Syed Hussain,

aged 26 years, resident of D.No.22-29-12,

Kanchara Street, Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                        ….. Complainant

And:-

M/s. Kiran Krishna Real Estate and Construction

Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director

Vallabhaneni Krishna Prasad, having office at

T.P.T. Colony, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                           …  Opposite Party

                     

This case coming on 01.10.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri Sridhar, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri B. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Party and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

        (As per Smt. K. Saroja Honourable Lady Member on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant joined as a member by paying initial payment of Rs.7,000/- on 10.04.1996 in  SAGARIKANAGAR layout for purchase of one plot for an extent of 444 Sq. yards and both the parties entered into an agreement on 10.04.1996 the Opposite Party allotted a Code No.93076.  According to the terms and conditions of the agreement the Complainant has to pay the plot cost in 60 installments viz. Rs.7,000/- as initial amount, Rs.7,550/- in 9 special installments and Rs.950/- in 60 installments.   Therefore, the total plot cost comes to around Rs.1,31,950/- (Rupees One lakh, thirty one thousand, nine hundred and fifty only), out of which the Complainant paid Rs.42,000/- towards sale consideration of the plot.   Subsequently, the Complainant came to know the Opposite Party failed to develop any layout as per specifications, and VUDA approval.   So, the VUDA Authority kept the Opposite Party Company under block list.   Hence, he stopped payment of further installments and requested the Opposite Party to refund the amount as paid by him.   But there is no response.   Hence, this Complaint.

 

2.       a) For recovery of a sum of Rs.42,000/- (Rupees forty two thousand  only) towards principal;

b) For recovery of a sum of Rs.1,39,104/- (Rupees One lakh, thirty nine thousand, one hundred and four only) towards interest and compensation;

c) For costs of the Complaint; and

d) For such other relief or reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

 

3.       The Opposite Party strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter.   The Complainant is a defaulter, he did not paid total amount towards consideration of the plot, the so called signed receipts filed by the Complainant are not issued by the Opposite Party.   As per the conditions of the sale agreement, the customers are not entitled for refund for amount paid by them.   So, they have no liable to pay any reliefs asked by the Complainant.

 

4.       At the time of enquiry, both the Opposite Parties filed their affidavits as well as written arguments to support their contentions.    Exs.A1 to A3 are marked for the Complainant.   No documents are marked for the Opposite Party.   Heard both sides.

 

5.       ExA1 is the Sale Agreement between N. Ranganayakamma and the Opposite Party dated 10.04.1996.   Ex.A2 is the bunch of the receipts(20) towards part payment of the sale consideration issued by the Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant on different dates.   Ex.A3 is the letter issued by the Opposite Party to complainant dated 29.03.2005 stating that they are unable to repay the amount of his account Code No.93076 of SAGARIKANAGAR as requested by him, due to financial crisis of our company for past several years.   So, you are not proceeding with any legal action against the Company.

 

6.       The point that would arise for determination in the case is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.  The Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

 

7.         After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that no witness signed on the Special Power of Attorney and also it is not notarized.   No signatures of the de-jure Complainant were found on any documents filed by the defacto Complainant i.e., Syed  Mujeeb.   As such, the supposed  signature of de-jure Complainant i.e., N. Ranganayakamma, on the supposed power of attorney cannot be taken on its face value as not even a single admitted signature of the said Ranganayakamma is available.   As such, from any angle, the supposed power of attorney is un-authenticated and hence invalid.   So, the supposed power of attorney holder, Syed Mujeeb, has no locus standi to file this complaint.   Therefore, this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

9.       In the result, this Complaint is dismissed.   But in the circumstances, no costs.

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this 11^th day of November, 2014.

 

Sd/-                                     Sd/-                                          Sd/-

President                            Male Member                        Lady Member

                                     

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	10.04.1996	Agreement of Sale Deed between Complainant and OP	Original
Ex.A02	10.04.1996 to 22.04.98	Bunch of Receipts issued by OP	Original
Ex.A03	29.03.2005	Letter addressed by the OP	Original

 

 

For the Opposite Party:-

                                                                                     

                                                -Nil-                                                                     

Sd/-                                     Sd/-                                          Sd/-

President                       Male Member                                               Lady Member